CA SB 947
California Senate Bill 947 - Employment: Automated Decision Systems
Adds Labor Code Part 5.5.5 on employers' use of automated decision systems (ADS). Bars using an ADS to violate labor or civil rights law, to infer an employee's protected status, or to predict and act against workers exercising legal rights; bars relying solely on an ADS for disciplinary or termination decisions and requires human corroboration where an ADS output is the primary basis; and requires a written post-use notice and, on request, a description of the employee's data used. Operative July 1, 2027.
Jurisdiction
California
Enacted
Sep 30, 2026
Effective
Jul 1, 2027
Enforcement
California Labor Commissioner (citations, temporary relief, civil actions); public prosecutors
Approved by Governor Newsom and chaptered by the Secretary of State on September 30, 2026 as Chapter 859, Statutes of 2026. Adds Part 5.5.5 (commencing with Section 1520) to Division 2 of the Labor Code. Passed the Assembly 53-14 on August 30, 2026; the Senate concurred in Assembly amendments 28-10 on August 31, 2026; enrolled and presented to the Governor on September 9, 2026. The act takes effect January 1, 2027 (no urgency clause) and Section 1526.7 makes the Part operative July 1, 2027.
California Legislative Information: SB 947, Chapter 859, Statutes of 2026 (chaptered text)Why It Matters
Requires human corroboration of ADS-driven disciplinary and termination decisions and shifts the burden of proof to the employer once ADS use is shown. Covers public employers as well as private ones, and does not preempt local ordinances that give employees equal or greater protection.
Recent Developments
Signed September 30, 2026 in a package with SB 951 (notice when a mass layoff, relocation or termination is caused by an AI system) and AB 1331 and AB 1883 (workplace surveillance tools). An employer that complies with the Part's notice requirements need not comply with substantially similar ADS notice provisions in other state law, except California Privacy Protection Agency automated decisionmaking technology regulations for businesses covered by the CCPA.
At a Glance
Applies to
Harms addressed
Who Must Comply
- Employers in California, including labor contractors, farm labor contractors and state and local government employers
- Disciplinary and termination decisions that rely on automated decision system output
Obligations fall on:
Safety Provisions
- Prohibits using an ADS to prevent compliance with or violate labor, occupational safety, employment or civil rights law, to infer protected status under Government Code section 12940, or to predict and take adverse action against workers for exercising legal rights
- Prohibits relying solely on an ADS for a disciplinary or termination decision
- Where an employer primarily relies on ADS output for discipline or termination, a human must corroborate it with other information such as supervisory evaluations, personnel files, work product, peer reviews or witness interviews; uncorroborated, inaccurate, incomplete or misleading output may not be used
- Written plain-language post-use notice to the affected employee stating that an ADS was primarily relied upon, that a human reviewed and corroborated it, and whom to contact
- Employee right to a meaningful, objective description of their own data used by the ADS, with other individuals' personal information anonymized
- Anti-retaliation protection; once ADS use in a disciplinary decision is shown, the employer bears the burden of showing it did not primarily rely on the ADS or complied with the Part
Exemptions
Collective bargaining agreement waiver
The Part does not apply to parties covered by a collective bargaining agreement that explicitly waives it in clear and unambiguous terms, provides for wages and working conditions, and provides protection from algorithmic management
- • Valid collective bargaining agreement
- • Explicit waiver of the Part
- • Agreement provides protection from algorithmic management
Federal aerospace and defense requirements
Does not apply to ADS use required by or reasonably necessary to comply with a federal statute, regulation or binding federal contract on aircraft development for the national airspace or national security, military, space or defense products and services
- • Use required or reasonably necessary under federal statute, regulation or binding contract
- • Aircraft or national security, military, space or defense development
Compliance & Enforcement
Key Dates
Jul 1, 2027
Labor Code Part 5.5.5 becomes operative: ADS prohibitions, human corroboration of ADS-driven discipline and termination, post-use notices and employee data access
Penalties
$500/violation
View on map
California
Focus Areas
Cite This
APA
California. (2026). California Senate Bill 947 - Employment: Automated Decision Systems.
Related Regulations
CA SB 503
Requires developers and deployers of AI clinical decision support systems used by health facilities, clinics and physician practices to make reasonable efforts to identify systems with a known or reasonably foreseeable risk of biased impacts on people with protected characteristics. Developers must mitigate those risks and give deployers an intended-use and risk statement plus documentation on training data, evaluation and data governance; deployers must regularly monitor the systems and mitigate.
CA AB 1979
Deems a business that offers a health care chatbot to consumers, for managing their information or for diagnosis, treatment or management of a medical condition, to be a provider of health care subject to the Confidentiality of Medical Information Act. Requires health facilities, clinics and physician practices to preserve licensed professionals' independent judgment when care is informed by clinical decision support AI, and bars them from using AI to independently perform, or to direct unlicensed personnel in, clinical functions that require a professional license.
TX Healthcare AI Law
Requires healthcare practitioners using AI for diagnosis to review all AI-generated records and disclose AI use to patients. Mandates EHR data localization (Texas patient data must be physically stored in US). Applies to covered entities and third-party vendors.
IL AI Employment Law
Amends Illinois Human Rights Act to make it a civil rights violation for employers to use AI that discriminates based on protected classes in employment decisions. Requires notice to employees and applicants when AI is used in hiring, firing, promotion, or discipline.
NYC LL 144
First-in-world law mandating bias audits for AI hiring tools. Requires annual independent audits and public disclosure of results.
IL AIVIA
Requires notice, consent, and transparency for AI analysis of video job interviews. Early state-level AI employment regulation.
Last updated October 4, 2026. Verify against primary sources before relying on this information.